Meal timings - are they important ?

FlowerPower8579

Will it make a difference if I eat small and regularly, say every two hours? Or shall I continue to eat meals fairly spaced out. I'm also exercising most days, so I'm trying to figure out whether to do fasted workouts in the morning, or eat first. I want to lose weight relatively fast so I'm not eating processed food. Also how late should I be eating my last meal. I can sometimes eat relatively late as I swim in the evenings. I feel like I'm just not getting anywhere at the moment! - Any help is much appreciated.

quiksylver296

No. Do what works for you.

ManBehindTheMask

No

kimny72

Nope. The only thing it will affect is your satiety, which differs person to person. So go with whatever schedule makes it easiest for you to stick to your calorie goal.

artbyrachelh

I understand frustration with not seeing a change. And I've heard making a change, i.e. "Shock your body" can help. But I think in general, if you're "stalling" it's due to eating at maintenance. In order to lose pounds eating fewer calories than you burn is what's needed. I don't have much experience, but I've read in these forums over and over, that it's the careful measuring of calories consumed that's going to yield best results of this app.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

Meal timing does not make a difference in weight loss. However it can make eating at a deficit easier depending on your own preferences.

I often skip breakfast and have a big lunch, afternoon snack and dinner. Last week I tried eating breakfast and having a lighter lunch and snack. I'm still not sure which makes it easier for me to stick with my deficit.

sijomial

Will it make a difference if I eat small and regularly, say every two hours?
Not if you keep your calories the same in total. Personally I would probably end up eating more if I snacked all day - YMMV.
(Hope you aren't thinking of some horrible old metabolism myth?)

Or shall I continue to eat meals fairly spaced out. I'm also exercising most days, so I'm trying to figure out whether to do fasted workouts in the morning, or eat first.
One meal or many makes no difference apart from adherence and that's very personal.
Fasted workouts make no difference - weight loss is down to calorie deficit over an extended period of time. Only difference it might make is if you actually perform better or worse fasted or fed. Again personal choice/preference. What fits your schedule best?

I want to lose weight relatively fast so I'm not eating processed food.
Wonder what you mean by "processed food"? Non processed food can be very high in calories.
Is losing fast appropriate for you? (i.e. have a lot of weight to lose.)

Also how late should I be eating my last meal. I can sometimes eat relatively late as I swim in the evenings.
As long as it doesn't cause you sleep problems it's irrelevant. Total calories over the course of a day is what matters.

I feel like I'm just not getting anywhere at the moment! - Any help is much appreciated.
Don't rely on feelings. Weigh yourself (maybe trend your weight?), take measurements, take progress pictures.

Trex5009

I know that eating meals within two hours of each other, or not even two hours, it just has to be relatively close... it speeds up your metabolism because your body burns down the food you just ate, and works on the new food you're consuming.

sijomial

Trex5009 wrote: »

I know that eating meals within two hours of each other, or not even two hours, it just has to be relatively close... it speeds up your metabolism because your body burns down the food you just ate, and works on the new food you're consuming.

And this is the horrible old metabolism myth I was talking about!

It's completely false.

kimny72

OP, I didn't notice your other questions. Weight loss comes down to calories. Get a food scale, log accurately and consistently. And I'd caution against fast weight loss. It's a foolproof recipe for gaining it all back, and often you don't look as good as you would if you give your body time to continue to adjust.

Alatariel75

Trex5009 wrote: »

I know that eating meals within two hours of each other, or not even two hours, it just has to be relatively close... it speeds up your metabolism because your body burns down the food you just ate, and works on the new food you're consuming.

This has been thoroughly debunked.

Wynterbourne

Trex5009 wrote: »

I know that eating meals within two hours of each other, or not even two hours, it just has to be relatively close... it speeds up your metabolism because your body burns down the food you just ate, and works on the new food you're consuming.

Absolutely, 100% untrue.

Meal timing is complete irrelevant. Eat when it works for you.

KarenSmith2018

I prefer fasted run first thing because I can't get up early enough to eat, digest it and then run. Plus I would be eating at like 0500 and then starving after so I would almost certainly overeat!

Meal timing makes no difference in 99% of the population. In professional athletes it can make a difference. The only reason to alter meal timings or size of meals is to enable adherence to your personal calorie limit;

rybo

It doesn't matter. But you may find that eating 1 or 2 big meals makes it easier for you to maintain a calorie deficit over the long term. Or you may find that grazing and eating many small meals works best for you. Only you can figure that out on your own.
Some people eat late and sleep well, others it causes heartburn issues. Again, just something to figure out yourself. As long as your overall calories are in check, eating late or the number of meals doesn't have any impact in and of itself.

Need2Exerc1se

FlowerPower8579 wrote: »

Will it make a difference if I eat small and regularly, say every two hours? Or shall I continue to eat meals fairly spaced out. I'm also exercising most days, so I'm trying to figure out whether to do fasted workouts in the morning, or eat first. I want to lose weight relatively fast so I'm not eating processed food. Also how late should I be eating my last meal. I can sometimes eat relatively late as I swim in the evenings. I feel like I'm just not getting anywhere at the moment! - Any help is much appreciated.

It is unimportant in a physical sense unless you have a medical condition that requires meal timing.

It can be very important in a sustainability sense. Eating in a manner that you can feel comfortable with even after you reach your goal weight can be quite important if you want to maintain your weight loss. Maintenance is where most people fail. Losing is usually the easy part.

jjpptt2

Meal timing is important in that doing it "properly" can work with your tendencies/preferences and help set you up for long term consistency and success... or it can work against you and make things harder to maintain.

But there's no magic to it.

Chieflrg

karenbeckwith5 wrote: »

I prefer fasted run first thing because I can't get up early enough to eat, digest it and then run. Plus I would be eating at like 0500 and then starving after so I would almost certainly overeat!

Meal timing makes no difference in 99% of the population. In professional athletes it can make a difference. The only reason to alter meal timings or size of meals is to enable adherence to your personal calorie limit;[/]

True for what the OP is asking, but hardly for 99% of population.

Meal timing has a lot to do with effciency with muscle synthesis.

Can you gain muscle without meal timing? Yes.

Can you gain more muscle synthesis take place with correct timing and adequate leucine? Yes.